Don't you think it's weird that so many people disagree, though? And not just the people who are always down for drama, but a lot of quality, reasonable posters from both sides of the political spectrum. I don't think this is a result of anyone feeling sorry for gturner. We all agree he's a punk. The issue people are having is that this is the first time that being a punk has had this kind of consequence. This is exactly the reason I am trying to have a civil conversation about it. Sometimes the actual point gets lost in all the ruckus. I would be equally as confused with a ban as I am with the decision to put him in the Violet Room. He doesn't appear to have done anything wrong. He's just annoying. Lots of people are annoying. Like I said, I don't think many people here give a rat's ass about gturner personally. It's just a shock that all of a sudden people who haven't broken any rules can be denied access to the main forum. To all the other forums (forii? ). I mean, he posted in the Green Room and Techforge, too. Agreed 100%. I appreciate the honesty, as always. Some are blowing the whole thing crazy out of proportion and going for personal attacks, conspiracy theories, etc. I have no doubt that you are being honest and forthcoming. I'm just.....confused, I guess. It's absolutely not personal. I took a pretty extended break, and it didn't seem any more or less toxic than usual when I came back. Your post above does make it seem like more of this is on the way, though. I'm not trying to "lawyerball" or anything, but can we get a general idea of what constitutes contributing to the toxicity? Is it just the combination of the content and frequency of his posts? Cause there are others that post a lot whose opinions are more palatable and then there are guys like Ramen whose posts are equally offensive, yet not as plentiful/long. Just trying to bridge the gap. If you don't want to explain it, the answer of "this is our decision and it's not up for debate" is one I will accept and I will STFU about it. It does mean you guys are significantly changing WF, though. I'll still post here and the world won't end. My friends are here and it's nostalgic for me. It will lose a little something that made it special, though.
It was never held out as an alternative to banning - and the person who suggested the WF Daycare knows I think it's a silly idea. WF is not TK and never was. Gtardo isn't like the "trolls" of TK. We should have had a clear rule change and time for him to adapt, or you guys should have had the balls to outright ban him, realising that you were essentially doing that anyway. Doubling down on this cringewoprthy idea that he's not actually banned is just plain embarassing- and simply becau8se you happen to like the person who suggested this idea (as do I) it doesn't mean it was the right one. Bullshit. Name one person, one, who's left WF because of gtardo. Contrast that to all the people who left when Gul took over. But gtardo is the thing that is destroying the board? Nope, sorry, not buying it. I accept that his continued presence may have begun to drive people off and that his shtick is annoying, but it's a matter of perspective. Not everyone here has the same view of him, and what he was doing was not against the rules. Really? Did you take the temperature of the forum before coming to this conclusion? It's easy to call someone a "shitposter" when you are opposed to their politics. But had he been an uber lefty, would you have been so capable of deciding he was a "shitposter"? I think not. Why? Because you would seem some value in his comments. We might not see value in what gtardo says, but that doesn't mean others don't. If gturner hasn't broken any rules, who are you to determine for others whether or not they think his content has merit? Who are the others and when can we expect their de facto bans? Yes, and some of us saw that and said it was bullshit even before the psuedo banning. This is such an arrogant attitude. The VR has only just been created, so he obviously didn't get long to see all these warnings (which I have to say I never saw either) before being shitcanned. Can you tell me why you couldn't just amend the rules to account for his style of spamming and then just give him a couple of months to conform? Please link to all these explicit warnings by return so that we can all review them ourselves. And? It was always your intention to do so. You forget I know how and why the Daycare idea was suggested directly from the person who suggested it. It was always about being a mechanism to entrap gturner, not something that was just a new idea for all members. I find that you're pretending otherwise to be extremely dishonest. I don't like it because it's unfair, and much of our criticism was stated before you did this. Keeping your word means what exactly? That you're men of honour? Men of honour act with fairness, even when they don't like the person who deserves it. Sorry, but what do these PMs prove exactly? You're just putting a spin on them to justify your actions. What if he simply thought "I was banned in error" or, not without jusitifcation, "I have been unfairly banned"? Bull. His prior supporters are still his supporters and everyone else has not been in contact with him. Shocking as it may seem, could it be that this was simply a bad idea and a poorly handled one at that? Bullshit, utter and absolute bullshit. Go and look at Mrs Albert's posts in the other thread that highlights how opponents of gtardo still think this is a bad idea. Bull. If it were just drama for the sake of drama and what people were saying had no merit then fine. But when the majority of posters think this and the WR were bullshit, and articulated their reasons properly, you can't hide behind the flaming pitchfork crap. Stop with this bullshit. Jesus wept. You have dumped in a room that is meant for call out threads, knowing full while that gtardo never has and likely never would have posted a call out thread. Are you honestly claiming that you're going to turn a blind eye if he starts spamming the VR with political threads? You cannot judge how he will post or if he will improve if he is consigned to one forum. This is another lame, poorly thought out claim. If he were banned I wouldn't shed one tear. He's a buffoon, but that isn't the point. It's about how you have done this and whether or not it was fair. It's about principle, because it shows that if you can be this uneven with someone you don't like then it means any one of us risks being treated unfairly as soon as you dislike us. That you are too obtuse to understand that moderator actions aren't just about the individual poster then I'm very disappointed in you. Because that too would've been unfair. I said before the de facto ban what would've been fair. But you guys thought "it's just Chup, we've decided he's trolling so can be ignored". But at least with an outright ban, combined with the honestly of saying "we don't like him", would have preserved you some dignity and support. But this halfway house bullshit, where you're trying to claim you're fair and have given him a chance, is just embarrassing and treats the board members like idiots who can't see the wood for the trees. Absolute bullshit. If there was openingness, when was asked about the ban were members given one line coy responses implying he simply wasn't banned? Members had to ask you how and why this came to be. That's hardly transparency. It was a concpiracy. The Daycare idea was specifically suggested as a way of dealing with gtardo. No more, no less. What I have come to learn recently is that the "truth" we are given rarely reflects the full story. Shame. No it hasn't. Stop lying. You know who suggested it and when. Bull. Says who? The only time it has truly become toxic is after the election result, and you're pinning that on gturner and not the election result are you? Unreal. He was an annoyance, but a tolerable one. He was never "toxic". Dinner is toxic, with his constant bigotry, but he's still here posting, so why shouldn't gtardo be? So you're basically calling me and others an idiot with this comment - and this is supposed to inspire faith in you as a mod is it? No, the choice isn't his. You've already made it for him. You know it and we know it. You're hanging onto this "still has a chance" bullshit like an insincere politician. It's people tiring of that sort of pompous arrogance, namely that the masses are too dumb to understand the great people in charge, that has given rise to popularism in politics today and the election of the likes of Trump. People get pissed off with being talked to as if they're idiots, because not all of us are. That you can't see the similar microcosm here is sad.
This exactly. Yes, we all know that there are a handful of people who will scream about any change, and also a handful of people who will nitpick anything to death for the sake of nitpicking. However, the creation of the Violet Room and gturner's isolation to it have now been objected to by a whole lot of people who are not in either of those groups, and who run the gamut of political persuasions. And "every change here is met with objection" is not something that, in and of itself, justifies any change. Each change needs to be taken on its own merits, and this one seems extremely problematic to me.
Sorry Dinner, you're toast. Gul has wanted you gone for a long time. If you thought I was lying about him promising me things in return for "dumbing" you into oblivion, I'm sorry. It's the truth.
I'm forced to agree with the decision of the admins again. It's not like gturner ever debates anything. He posts at you, and invariably ignores whatever responses he gets.
So now the story has changed. John is now characterizing himself as a reluctant participant, dragged into this by the owners. The distancing begins. He was just following orders. You know, I'm tired of seeing John's tapdancing. If he wants to claim that he's not an owner, that he only follows orders, then the ones who should be talking are the owners. I'm not interested in what the footsoldier has to say. shootER & Anna - stop hiding and defend your horseshit. I haven't seen any of you dipshits offer a single shred of evidence that he did anything to merit a ban. All you've got is ambiguous butthurt. Fuck you.
Well, no, actually, because there was a communication with gturner via PM, explicitly laying things out for him. It's pretty funny that he so easily manipulates you, though. Makes me wonder whether your whole conversion from progressive liberal to alt-right buffoon was entirely his doing.
I actually really liked shooter's response. He's just straight up like "I would have banned him". Someone says "because you don't like him" and he hits agree. Reminds me of UA.
You know, since gturner's posts outside the Red Room have been fine, why not allow him to post in those areas, but restricting his RR posting ability to the VR? If he behaves himself outside the VR for a period of time, then give him full privileges again, but if he shows his ass in one of the other forums, lock him down to just the VR.
random fact: there's currently about 10 parodies and variations in Red, and half of this new forum is devoted to, you guessed it... talking about Gtard and this stupid gulag. Way to contain the spam...
Why not post the PM? You've pretty much banned him anyway. Oh yeah, because you can rely on the technical argument that he's still a member and needs to give permission.....
There are lots of folks throughout the history of Wordforge that probably deserved bans. Sokar & Tasvir to name just a couple. Disliking someone has never been a justification for banning someone from WF. Threatening to reveal to the membership that your cybersex partner isn't a law enforcement officer - now that was a banable offense.
And yet the four of you couldn't come up with it despite this supposedly just being about gtardo's RR spamming. Would you allow him Help Desk access as well?
I completely understand your concerns. I like being liked, so believe me I know any time something gets changed, I brace myself for what I know is coming. When it is the thoughtful, reasonable posters like you, @tafkats, @Spaceturkey, (fuck @K. that name changing bastard), and a few others, I don't mind answering, because I know you'll actually read my words for what they are, and not whatever narrative you've built to make this board seem like Nazi Germany II: Electric Boogaloo. I think, actually, that @Tuckerfan brought up a great idea that, to be honest, I never considered. We're looking into it right now. Thank you for being patient, though.
Help Desk? Yes. I don't revoke Help Desk access, unless it's like a Baba thing where someone spams a hundred threads or something.
@gturner can now access all of the board, except for the Red Room. Thanks @Tuckerfan for the idea, your bribe is in the mail.
Not at the time of his ban, no. I had to go back in and add it when I saw it wasn't a part of the accessed group, but he did have it shortly thereafter. The permissions system Xenforo uses is a bit of a pain in the ass. Why would I make the decision on my own? I liked the idea, but I don't own the board. It was up to the horsemen, and they chose to run with it.
Why are you their fucking mouth piece? Do they lack the balls to speak for themselves? You're only good for half-answers and not very well thought out ones at that. Go away.
Fucking pathetic. That you did this mere minutes after it was suggested not only shows an obvious attempt to desperately backtrack to try and avoid more heat, but it also shows that the initial decision wasn't well thought out at all. How are we supposed to have confidence in mod decisions with that in mind? So gturner was banned from the Help Desk as well? Did you inform him immediately when it was lifted? Oh no, you couldn't because he longer has PM access.... Running quickly behind partial placation instead of having the guts to come out and face the music. Shameful. Seems my comparison to politicians wasn't misplaced.
You haven't told us what you told gturner not to do, what he did to get VR-banned, and what he has to do to get back to the RR. You haven't told us what the new rules are. So no, they're not "whole" answers.
